When I find things like this, I appreciate that I get the reference. I don't really get bothered by it.
Given that the Madonna is holding a dead child, I think it is offensive.
She is reanimating him. Isn't that the legend?
You are incorrect, study more art history maybe?
It's not a dead child. It's Jesus. There's angels around her.
I saw that also but did not want to mention it. but the child is sleeping according to many analysis.
Did not see any reference to that, but one said it represented immaculate conception. I don't see that.
It is literally a depiction of the Madonna and Baby Jesus. There is no other interpretation the work was commissioned by the funerary of an Italian cardinal.
The painting depicts the Virgin Mary seated on a high pedestal in luxurious robes, holding a large baby Jesus on her lap.
I guess you never had to read a poem in school and describe what the dead author intended. You can spend a semester breaking down "The Raven".
Google will give you scores of breakdowns on what they think this painting represents.
I'm offended by your avatar. That cat has a really sassy look I just don't like...
The cat, may he Rest In Peace, was sassy from time to time. His name was Magnus, and he was my emotional support animal. Magnus was gentle, loving and sweet tempered, and a perfect companion in every way. This past week was the third anniversary of his death and I mourn his passing everyday.
I do have an MA in art history—in renaissance art. There is a full color photo of the painting in Hart’s “Italian Renaistance Art”, which was the standard textbook on the subject in my undergraduate days. So yes I am qualified to recognize this very famous painting and to understand its iconography. I am not religious, but I do appreciate and enjoy religious art. While I find the Madonna with the Long Neck disturbing and even grotesque, that is not my point. I asked why there is a religious painting in this game. I just do not think that religious art has any place in a secular game.
Sosaria is connected to Earth.
I always thought that picture was a blurry ballerina dancing on 1 leg.
Who designated UO as a secular game, and what does that mean in the first place? If the game is not proclaimed to be religious in substance, does it mean that no religious symbols are allowed anywhere? Then I have news for you. There is religious symbolism all over the game. Or is it just Christian symbolism that one is supposed to be offended over? And, the book-burning and Voltaire references are just laughable - you supposedly are against book burning, yet advocate for a removal of an obscure image that nobody but you chose to be offended over. You quote Voltaire, but casually dub all those who have different opinions from yours "idiots". It seems your liberal arts education failed to teach you to be, well - liberal.
I was referencing the spirit of Miretar's quote which makes him a hypocrite. Now if what he is actually referencing is really a Voltaire quote, I can't say for sure. Given that he's been wrong about many of the details of the said picture that has earned his wrath... I wouldn't put money on it.
Miretar said:
Thanks I get it now. rephrase the quote to I defend UOs right to use the picture. I am Literal I have to see it in black and white.
While I do understand that this is true, I generally don't believe this. I do believe that most players did choose good over evil. The evil deeds, however, are just more memorable than the good ones. The evil deeds are the ones that the developers heard about and caused people to complain about the game. Good deeds, for the most part, are boring and don't require any developer attention, so they mainly go unnoticed despite being an overwhelming majority of what takes place in the game.
You can spin it however you want, I am speaking directly from reading Garriot's and other developers own words that I have read multiple times.
I would assume that artists are lazy and classic paintings such as this are public domain and are freely available for commercial use.
Again, I understand that what you say is true and I am not applying any sort of spin on what you stated, as it cannot be refuted that Garriot and other developers have said this. I am merely pointing out that just because they are developers and stated it does not make it true. I have read the same things but have not seen any data points backing it up, likely because they don't exist. The developers likely speak based off of feedback that they received during their time as developers but "good deeds" likely don't generate much memorable feedback, at least not nearly as much as the "evil deeds" do.
Data points? You want a psychological case study, a statistical analysis of good or evil deeds, or a "gallop poll"? To open the whole can of worms for the 60,0000th time, they seriously considering shutting UO down because the player base was dropping like flies due to such "good" behavior. The fact that subscriptions were tanking in corellation to the complaints - there's your data points. The only ones that matter. The bottom line - ratio of money. coming in vs cost of upkeep. They decided on splitting the worlds into Trammel & Felluca to try & save it. This I read maybe a few months ago from one of the devs back then. I really should start saving this stuff. But then again, I don't need to be convinced, I have experienced the game in its good and bad phases for 24+ yrs.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I read the same things and I probably know exactly what article you are talking about. The data points, as I said, probably don't exist. What I can assure you of, is that for every Belan the Looter, every Chad Sexington, every idocguy, there are probably 500 people that killed 800,000 balrons or whatever and saved the realm from certain destruction. You just don't know who those 500 noble people are because they are boring. Those 500 people don't cause people to take to the forums with torches and pitchforks. You didn't have to create Trammel because of those 500 people. That fact could cause a developer to believe that the majority of people chose evil over good, when it simply is not the case.
Just go pop a champ...
In an mmo I played for 6.5 yrs, I went out of my way to help several "noobies". But here is where I am sure I fundamentally differ from most people. I might be considered a bit cynical but it to me an important difference.
I used to do this all the time. Pop a champ, work the spawn, wait for the raid, bring in my thief, profit. It takes longer than begging for a few million and isn't always successful.
Exactly. I highly doubt that the evil players ever outnumbered the good, despite what past developers or some players say. I think that the developers hypothesis on morality was always true, but the fact that the "evil" players caused them more stress than they imagined overshadowed that truth.
